Fantastic post!
I just wanna emphasize that last part.
If you have persistent pain, and you’ve already checked the obvious stuff, you absolutely need to see a doctor. It’s not just about maximizing your fun. Chronic pelvic pain can indicate serious problems.
Way larger than I imagined, too. And yeah, I would also suspect they’re pretty messy and occassionally traumatic. But so are monogamous relationships.
I wouldn’t worry about eating your hat here. And also, I’m not digging the downvotes you’ve been catching. I think you presented a pretty reasonable take based on your own experience. That’s not the same experience everyone has, but that’s kinda the whole point of this thread, isn’t it?
Results show that 1 out of 6 people (16.8%) desire to engage in polyamory, and 1 out of 9 people (10.7%) have engaged in polyamory at some point during their life. Approximately 1 out of 15 people (6.5%) reported that they knew someone who has been or is currently engaged in polyamory.
Seems like it’s fairly common.
https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/psychology/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.619640/full
It’s as normal as dyeing your hair blue. It’s not the go-to for everybody, but if you go to the supermarket it’s right there on the shelf with all the other options.
Functionex: because a monad is just a monoid in the category of endofunctors.
My phone’s keyboard automatically does it — deal with it, nerd.
True… but you can sure enable one by not voting.
Not technically, because there are scenarios where you can give up some freedom or safety without improving the other in return (and therefore restore freedom/safety afterwards without diminishing the other)… but it’s a close enough approximation to be useful, kinda like classical physics vs general relativity.
If you want to be more detailed, you can look at “freedom to” vs “freedom from”. This has its own limitations, but it’s precise enough while still being useful.
For example, assuming everyone involved is constrained by the same rules:
You can’t have the freedom to fire a gun in the air, and have freedom from your neighbor’s falling bullets.
You can’t have the freedom to drive a tank down the street, and have freedom from fear of being squashed as a pedestrian.
But then you’ll need dog water to deal with the cat water
Need bag water to counteract the mouse water
Bring knowledge of CFCs to a time when we’re able to make them but not able to detect the ozone problems they cause.
Tracking down my references to obscure cognitive science podcasts gives people a sense of pride and accomplishment.
…much like the escalation from vegetarianism to local-first, as described by McRaney’s guest whose book cover features a rubber duck.
Damn, my bad for mentioning a thing that may become relevant if they need new hardware.
I guess I’ll just leave them along with the other comments, which… suggest they’ll probably need new hardware.
It won’t work on Android, but you could probably replace Android or attach a mini PC.
Idk if this helps, but I recently learned Plasma BigScreen is a thing.
Eggs because:
Vance gave a quote bashing the price of eggs, but he cited a number much higher than the sign he was standing next to.
Dems pounced on this, mocking the blatant exaggeration and dismissing any concerns about a cost of living crisis.
It stuck around because it’s emblematic of the overall situation:
Repubs don’t give a shit about facts, just vibes, and wanna paint as dark of a picture as possible.
Dems only care about being correct on paper, and don’t give a shit about listening to the problems of ordinary people or doing anything that could be called “radical”.
I hate this kind of doomerism so much.
I know it’s just a shower thought, which are meant to be kinda flawed and reductive, but it’s just such a reckless dismissal of everything we’ve accomplished as a species.
I think Hank Green says it best: https://youtu.be/FcbtkVTAyqM
Edit: On Lemmy, if you just link to a video people will say “Can’t you provide a tl;dw?” but it you do provide a tl;dw, they’ll respond with stuff that’s covered in the video.
Nice try, insurance data broker.
It’s okay, Let’s Encrypt only provides SSL certs for… 63.7% of the market?
Okay okay, that is a lot. But what does a CA need funding for anyway? It doesn’t take much bandwidth to send out new certs.
The only thing that could be expensive is if they had to rapidly invalidate thousands of certs to protect the security of the entire internet.
But haha, that’s a pretty outlandish scenario that would never happen.